Gadget blog Gizmodo is causing a stir this afternoon with a new report alleging that Apple has misled the public about the reasons behind its exit from Macworld Expo, claiming Steve Jobs' deteriorating health is to blame for the matter.

The online publication cites a source which has reportedly been "100% correct" when providing information and photographs of unreleased Apple products in the past. This source is now said to have passed on information charging Apple with misrepresenting the reasons behind its pullout from future Macworlds and the cancelation of Jobs' keynote address at next week's show.

"The real cause is his rapidly declining health," the report claims. "In fact, it may be even worse than we ever imagined." An unedited citation from the publication's source reads as follows:

Steves health is rapidly declining. Apple is choosing to remove the hype factor strategically vs letting the hype destroy apple when the inevitable news comes later this spring.

This strategic loss will be less of a bang with investors. This is why MacWorld is a no-go anymore. No more Steve means no more hype. Saying they are no longer needing [MacWorld] is the cover designed by the worldwide "loyalty" department.

Apple declined to comment on the report, which Gizmodo is billing as a rumor that it hopes "is absolutely wrong." Nevertheless, the gadget publication places much of the blame for the reoccurring rumors on the company itself, citing its decision to hold back critical information about the welfare of its chief executive in the past.

A cancer surviver, Jobs underwent successful surgery in 2004 to remove a malignant tumor from his pancreas. Apple, however, remained secretive about the matter until the operation was complete and Jobs sent this email to employees from his hospital bed.

In the years that followed, little concern was expressed over the health of the company luminary given Apple's claims that he had recovered fully from his bout with the deadly disease. Fears were only rekindled with some emphasis early this year when Jobs took the stage at the company's annual developers conference looking uncomfortably frail.

Since then, its been revealed that he underwent a second surgery earlier this year to address a nutrition problem that was contributing to his weight loss. Investor jitters over the matter continued to weigh on Apple shares, however, prompting Jobs to contact the New York Times on his own accord and assure a reporter that the most recent issues were not life threatening and that he did not have a recurrence of cancer.

The subject of who should be privy to information on Jobs' health remains a much debated and dicey subject. While some industry watchers believe the company co-founder's health is a private matter and no one else's business but his own, some Apple investors don't necessarily agree. They say Jobs' sheer value, estimated to be worth more to Apple than any other chief executive in the world, should afford them the right to be informed about material changes to his health.

In a report published last year, financial publication Barron's Magazine suggested that Apple's market cap would instantly bleed $20 billion in value should Jobs abruptly be forced to abandon his leadership role at the company.

Meanwhile, CNBC's Jim Goldman, one of the most outspoken figures on Jobs' health, contacted Apple following Gizmodo's report and was again told that the company's Macworld exit was a result of a trend that has seen the electronics maker scale back on trade show spending and "that the decision had nothing to do with Jobs' health."

"I will say again: if Apple is lying, holding some truth back, manipulating its own stock by manipulating the truth, someone — indeed a lot of people — could be going to jail," he wrote in a piece published just minutes ago. "When Apple's got something material to report, I trust that it will. Meantime, unsourced garbage nuking its shares is just that."

Yeah, Apple really wants to go through more court cases, investigations and fines, especially after the options scandal. If Jobs is materially sick, Apple will disclose it. Everything else is just bullshit.

Gadget blog Gizmodo is causing a stir this afternoon with a new report alleging that Apple has mislead the public about the reasons behind its exit from Macworld Expo, claiming Steve Jobs' deteriorating health is to blame for the matter. ...

Or Jobs could be stepping back just because he is tired of this never-ending crap about his health, and the negative effect it has on the stock price and the company as a whole.

I think it's true that if Apple is lying on this that there are serious legal implications, and thus I don't believe the story.

I also think that Gizmodo should be in some serious legal trouble for promulgating this irresponsible junk when it's finally proven false. Those idiots make Rob Enderle look smart and professional in comparison and have been caught recently doing this same kind of un-sourced, unchecked, reporting on issues that strongly affect the price of the stock.

Just shows that you can get teenagers to apologise after they make a mess, but you can't actually get them to stop making the mess.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

hmm, I am starting to believe it is possibly true that he has a health problem. If this is proven, I think it could possibly be very bad for apple if he dies (god forbid). I thought all of these were just rumors, but I think there are just too many too ignore anymore. I think apple needs to tell us something. NOW.

Listen I am just as concerned as everyone on this matter... but I have a friend that works at Apple Headquarters in UI design. Me and him have talked about this a couple of times now... he never tells me anything that he does for work, because he isn't allowed to. But what he has told me is that on most days Steve eats lunch about the same time he does. Steve usually sits with Jonathan Ive and a handful of other Executives. He says that visually there is nothing wrong with him. He looks fine. I asked is he still really thin? His response was No, he definitely is not. but he isn't pudgy in the waist any more, his opinion is that steve is aging. He is 53 about to be 54 years old, he just isn't young looking anymore. He is just thinning out a little with age is all. He assures me based on what he has seen, that there is nothing wrong with Steve, and the media is blowing everything out of proportion.

As far as macworld goes, I will definitely miss Macworld keynotes! but now we can all buy freely around christmas time, and never have to worry about what apple is coming out with in early January!

Dear SEC enforcement ... It is your responsibility to do something about false rumor mongering. This Gizmodo hit piece is just such a story. The editor later scrambled to edit the post by adding an "allegedly" and replacing "solid source" with "previously reliable" ... but the report was/is blatantly false and damage was done to Apple (AAPL) shareholders (see today's AAPL chart below).

LOL. Did you seriously email that tripe to the SEC?

Apple fanbois are out of control.

Fragmentation is not just something we have to acknowledge and accept. Fragmentation is something that we deal with every day, and we must accept it as a fact of the iPhone platform experience.

He had cancer. He had a radical surgery because of the cancer. He looked like crap the last time he was seen in public. And he doesn't like his health to be made public. I don't know if the story has any validity, but his outlook can't be that great.

It's not a "fan boy" issue. If you own Apple stock and some asshat is manipulating the price through irresponsible behaviour and rumour mongering, well... that's against the law, and you have every right to protect your investment by registering a complaint about these guys.

It's not like Giz is a personal web blog or something it's a big concern funded by a large company with a huge readership. They have a responsibility to behave, well responsibly. They don't (by and large) and mostly they get away with it.

Personally, it would make my day to see the thing shut down, but mostly just because of the potty-mouthed writers, the porn and the nastiness. They could easily get into some serious trouble over this though. Dumb jokes and asshat-ery, you can usually get away with. Dumb jokes that cost people millions of dollars, not so much.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

Personally, it would make my day to see the thing shut down, but mostly just because of the potty-mouthed writers, the porn and the nastiness. They could easily get into some serious trouble over this though. Dumb jokes and asshat-ery, you can usually get away with. Dumb jokes that cost people millions of dollars, not so much.

Are you for real?

Anyone still holding Apple stock at this stage of the game deserves whatever they get.

Anyone still holding Apple stock at this stage of the game deserves whatever they get.

Exactly. Trying to blame the stock price decline of AAPL on a news story about something that EVERYBODY already knows, which is that Steve Jobs has cancer and is not healthy, while ignoring that Apple is a luxury company during a depression, is frankly moronic.

Fragmentation is not just something we have to acknowledge and accept. Fragmentation is something that we deal with every day, and we must accept it as a fact of the iPhone platform experience.

Also they have started several stupid rumours like this in the last year or so also, and are almost never right about any of their "predictions" anyway.

I've also had emails with two or three of the people who write for the site and it's like reading something my twelve-year old nephew would write. Seriously. I'm not really sure why Gizmodo hasn't been sued for a number of things they have done in the past, but perhaps they were and just kept it quiet.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

Exactly. Trying to blame the stock price decline of AAPL on a news story about something that EVERYBODY already knows, which is that Steve Jobs has cancer and is not healthy, while ignoring that Apple is a luxury company during a depression, is frankly moronic.

For the record, the words 'cancer free' were used last summer to assure the board of his good health. But yeah, I think his health overall is suspect.

It's not a "fan boy" issue. If you own Apple stock and some asshat is manipulating the price through irresponsible behaviour and rumour mongering, well... that's against the law, and you have every right to protect your investment by registering a complaint about these guys.

It's not like Giz is a personal web blog or something it's a big concern funded by a large company with a huge readership. They have a responsibility to behave, well responsibly. They don't (by and large) and mostly they get away with it.

Personally, it would make my day to see the thing shut down, but mostly just because of the potty-mouthed writers, the porn and the nastiness. They could easily get into some serious trouble over this though. Dumb jokes and asshat-ery, you can usually get away with. Dumb jokes that cost people millions of dollars, not so much.

So by your logic every time AppleInsider posts "Rumors" about unsubstantiated rumors about a new Apple product they should be reported to the SEC?

Rumor sites just like this one can and have moved the stock price.

When it gets personal (as in Steve Jobs health) it's illegal to pass along another rumor because the "rumor" is negative?

If Apples stock is tied that closely to Steve's health then Apple needs to make a public announcement (preferably by Steve Jobs) and stop the rumors.

He says that visually there is nothing wrong with him. He looks fine. I asked is he still really thin? His response was No, he definitely is not. but he isn't pudgy in the waist any more, his opinion is that steve is aging. He is 53 about to be 54 years old, he just isn't young looking anymore. He is just thinning out a little with age is all.

He's also a hard core Vegan. Hard to maintain any real body weight when you don't eat real food.

"This is why Macworld is a no-go anymore. No more Steve means no more hype. Saying they are no longer needing [Macworld] is the cover designed by the worldwide 'loyalty' department."

The claim is being made that canceling future MacWorlds is a result of Steve's health. That's absurd. Health COULD be a possible reason for Steve dropping out this year, but there's no good reason for it to be a reason for dropping out altogether - least ways, not for announcing that fact at this time. The reason for dropping out of future MacWorlds is independent of Steve's health.

Thus the rumor is at least partially nonsense. It's probably completely false. It's a shame it was published.

Sadly he and many others are for real, they have yet to accept current market realities. Apples stock is grossly over priced when you consider other sound opportunities. Frankly a investment in Ford has less of a downside risk than Apple right now. That is an assesment based on current mongering about the state of the economy. Personally I don't think it is as bad as the new administration implies as our current condition was obviously manipulated to set the stage for the election of a liberal government. Everyone here should be ready for the snow job, coming in 8 to 12 months, about how Obama save the economy.

Quote:

Anyone still holding Apple stock at this stage of the game deserves whatever they get.

Well maybe as a long term investment ten years out it may pay off marginally. For investment in the shorter term it is a big gamble in my mind. This mostly due to investors like the one you quoted not taking in all the facts. Well if you accept that the economy is goinig into depression as fact, that you accept that there are far better investment opportunities in the market right now and that you accept as fact that Apple isn't optimizing it's product line up for the wants and desires of it's customers in the future.

That is not to say that Apple doesn't have potential but they seem to have run past an innovation black hole of late. Unless Apple surprises us at MWSF it looks like no new Mac platforms but rather respond of old concepts like the Mini and iMac. Frankly this is sad. This doesn't even take into account the Touch devices market where there really seems to be a lack of vision as to what these devices could be. That combined with what could be called a regression in the last Touch upgrade really has me wondering if Apple hasn't lost it's groove.

Now I'm an Apple user, both a MBP and a iPhone, so I do have a users perspective. That perspective isn't as positive as I would like, iPhone as an OS still has issues with Apple supplied software. Even the latest MacOS is still problematic, especially with certain networks. Yeah the devices are better than the competition right now but they are skating on thin ice. Plus as each day passes I believe more and more that Apple is just being bullheaded about fleshing out the missing components that iPhone should have. Apple currently walking a ridge with some sharp fall offs, a little bit more consumer dissatisfaction could bump them over the edge.

So either way as a consumer or as an investor Apple has issues. Frankly it may be a good time for Steve to leave as both the Mac and iPod divisions need beefing up. It is almost funny hearing Apple say that one of the goals of Snow Leopard is to address stability and performance issues, stability should have been a given.

Look at this in another way. If it was true that Steve Jobs' health is poor to the degree of it being life-threatening, don't you think that the succession would have been sorted out LONG before now. Also that the focus would have been much more solidly shifted already onto other players at a senior level.

No company with Apple's PR nous would let things drift in this area until suddenly Steve was not around any more. It's just crazy to think they would.

Have you ever had contact with a hardcore Vegan or worst yet their children? If you have you would have understood the original comment. If you are a Vegan yourself you likely have blinders on with respect to your own state of health and physical preparedness.

@ wizard69: Are you really for real? If you are then you're seriously talking out of an orifice other than your mouth. Your post is so wrong in so many ways that it's not worth even starting with it...

Is Gizmodo the website that printed the false rumour that the iPhone (original) was going to be delayed, thus sending Apple stock way down (summer of 2007)?

Does anybody remember? (It was either them or Engadget).

The issue of Jobs' health is something investors should consider, if it's important to them - that's one of the risks of investing. But Apple should not have to give reports on Jobs' health, unless required by law.

If you think Apple will fall apart without Jobs, sell your stock and shut up.

Look at this in another way. If it was true that Steve Jobs' health is poor to the degree of it being life-threatening, don't you think that the succession would have been sorted out LONG before now. Also that the focus would have been much more solidly shifted already onto other players at a senior level.

Last time I saw Steve he was on stage with two other people One being Phil. And Phil is giving the keynote just as of like December 12(ish). Perhaps the succession is already underway.

If Apple didn't have a succession plan before Steve got sick, you can be sure they have one now.

I know many vegans, and none of them are fat. They're all pretty healthy, and not overly skinny either.

If you try to eat only fruit, as some people do, you will become unhealthy over time. Other than that, there really aren't problems with a well-rounded vegan diet, even one that's primarily raw. It's all in how smart you go about it.

People see the radical eaters, and think all vegans are like that. Not true - there are a lot of quiet vegans who don't preach to anyone else, and just go about their lives.

It's just like any religion - there are fundamentalists, and there are rational, quiet people who are happy within themselves.

There would have been MUCH more done to shift the focus away from Steve by now if he was in a seriously bad way. Having a couple of other people share one keynote is not sufficient to qualify as focus-shifting. Do you really think that is all they would have done if they really wanted to shift the focus. You are very naive if that is your view of how PR works!

Sadly he and many others are for real, they have yet to accept current market realities. Apples stock is grossly over priced when you consider other sound opportunities. Frankly a investment in Ford has less of a downside risk than Apple right now. That is an assesment based on current mongering about the state of the economy. Personally I don't think it is as bad as the new administration implies as our current condition was obviously manipulated ... (insert long weird insane rant here) ...

Wow.

Dave (if that's your name), I am seriously shocked.

I had you pegged as a very smart and insightful guy based on your comments on other articles in this forum. You sound like a seriously insane "tin-hat brigade" member here.

It's a simple fact of statistics that fewer than 5% of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer are still alive 5 years later.

Yeah, that is unless you got the *other* kind of pancreatic cancer that Steve actually has where you can live a long and full life if you watch what you eat.

The main reason I think this is a hoax is all the very low level of debate on this and other threads about it. It's as if the Gizmodo readership has been let out of the school yard for the day and are infesting otherwise good forums with their ignorant remarks.

All that junk about Steve being a Vegan and if he ate "properly" he wouldn't have the problem are so stunningly wrong and misinformed as to what he actually has and the facts about his operation and Veganism in general it's hard to fathom.

For the record he's *not* actually a Vegan, and the only way his health *can* be threatened is if he did for some insane reason, chose to go off his diet. It's fatty foods, hamburgers, re-meat, etc. that will actually kill him. If he ate "normal (fast) food" that would be the quickest way to the grave, not a cure.

In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...

That is an assesment based on current mongering about the state of the economy. Personally I don't think it is as bad as the new administration implies as our current condition was obviously manipulated to set the stage for the election of a liberal government. Everyone here should be ready for the snow job, coming in 8 to 12 months, about how Obama save the economy.

snip

Well if you accept that the economy is goinig into depression as fact

Dave

You are simply amazing, I have to say. Anyone who believes that the incredible economic mess now befalling the world is a fiction is capable of anything, like voting for a Bush to be their president - oh, you already did that three times eh? Give me a minute and I will try and think up something equally outrageous and unbelievable you might be capable of, but that one is going to be hard to top.

Yeah, that is unless you got the *other* kind of pancreatic cancer that Steve actually has where you can live a long and full life if you watch what you eat.

The main reason I think this is a hoax is all the very low level of debate on this and other threads about it. It's as if the Gizmodo readership has been let out of the school yard for the day and are infesting otherwise good forums with their ignorant remarks.

All that junk about Steve being a Vegan and if he ate "properly" he wouldn't have the problem are so stunningly wrong and misinformed as to what he actually has and the facts about his operation and Veganism in general it's hard to fathom.

For the record he's *not* actually a Vegan, and the only way his health *can* be threatened is if he did for some insane reason, chose to go off his diet. It's fatty foods, hamburgers, re-meat, etc. that will actually kill him. If he ate "normal (fast) food" that would be the quickest way to the grave, not a cure.

not to mention that he is also one of the wealthiest people in the world, and probably has access to some fantastic doctors. i'm sure those others in that 5 percent don't have that.

...and like he said, steve (as far as i know) isn't vegan. i know this because i am pescitarian, which is what he is as well.

There would have been MUCH more done to shift the focus away from Steve by now if he was in a seriously bad way. Having a couple of other people share one keynote is not sufficient to qualify as focus-shifting. Do you really think that is all they would have done if they really wanted to shift the focus. You are very naive if that is your view of how PR works!

Nobody here knows for a fact what is going behind the scenes. It is not uncommon for a company to keep power-shifts under wraps even from it's own employees.

I'm UN-naive enough to know that Apple's brand of PR involves being very quite when it doesn't want to talk about things and keeping things under a veil of secrecy. Here's hoping that Steve is fine and this rumor is false.